SCCA is contemplating a new helmet rule -- full-face helmets would not be
allowed in cars with airbags -- and has issued fair warning:
http://www.scca.com/_Filelibrary/File/AirbagAdvisory.pdf
I think it is a good idea, but with a minor reservation. I have written my
area director and SCCA to say so:
v v v v v v
>>This looks like a great thing to do, but I would suggest a more
>>conservative approach -- strongly recommend it for 2005, require it for
>>2006. Two reasons:
>>Reason 1: The new Snell 2005 helmet standard will not be available in
>>helmets-to-buy until after October 1, 2005. Hence, new Snell standards
>>cannot be required by SCCA before 2006.
>>See http://www.smf.org/pdf/m_sa_k2005_timeline3.pdf -- which is a memo
>>from the Snell Foundation on the timeline for the new standards,
Also FYI, http://www.smf.org/pdf/sak2005_std_draft3.pdf and
http://www.smf.org/pdf/m2005_std_draft3.pdf are the draft standards for
SA/K2005 and M2005 helmets.
>>Requiring people competing with full-face helmets to buy open-face helmets
>>in 2005 means they can get nothing newer than a Snell 2000 helmet. Wait
>>one year and they get a Snell 2005 helmet. They can get four more years
>>out of their new helmet (and presumably a better helmet) if SCCA would
>>just hold off one year before making it mandatory
>>Reason 2: The year of it being "strongly recommended" has the added
>>benefit of giving regions time to inform their drivers and officials. Note
>>that this is going to affect drivers who are largely unlicensed for
>>competition. Thus the process of informing them is not as refined as for
>>racers. Great numbers of them will discover the new rule when they show up
>>at events and are told their nifty full-face helmet is no longer legal
>>because their car has an airbag. We also need time to train tech
>>inspectors to look for this -- these, again, are unlicensed tech
>>inspectors at events such as autocrosses who are not formally trained and
>>do not have the communication pipeline club racing scrutineers have.
>>I believe the concept is excellent, but to rush it into place is going to
>>create more problems than it will solve -- the type of problems often seen
>>as "hassle" if forced too quickly or stringently, resulting in enmity
>>toward SCCA and lost potential members.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
If you have similar thoughts, tell your area director and SCCA.
--Rocky Entriken
|